Does the Therapist's Assessment of Movement Control in Low Back Pain Patients Correspond to an Objective Kinematic Modification (LOBACOM)

• Exercise-based treatment is part of the recommendations for good practice in the treatment of low back pain (acute, sub-acute and chronic).
• The low back pain population is heterogeneous. This heterogeneity would cause the positive effects of a treatment to be canceled out by the negative effects of another part of the population.
• This polymorphism has led several authors to classify low back pain into subgroups. These subgroups constitute more homogeneous clinical pictures and would facilitate the adaptation of treatments.
• The recommendations of the American Physical Therapy Association suggest 5 subgroups of low back pain. One of them is "low back pain with movement coordination defect". In this subgroup, Luomajoki studied the reliability of different functional tests used in clinical practice. 6 out of 10 motion control fault tests show good reliability.
• The quantified analysis of the movement of low back pain patients would make it possible to determine the sensitivity of detecting an anomaly in the 6 lumbar movement control tests.

Study Overview

• Status: Recruiting
• Conditions: Chronic Low-back Pain
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: motion control fault tests

Detailed Description

• Exercise-based treatment is part of the recommendations for good practice in the treatment of low back pain (acute, sub-acute and chronic).
• The low back pain population is heterogeneous. This heterogeneity would cause the positive effects of a treatment to be canceled out by the negative effects of another part of the population.
• This polymorphism has led several authors to classify low back pain into subgroups. These subgroups constitute more homogeneous clinical pictures and would facilitate the adaptation of treatments.
• The recommendations of the American Physical Therapy Association suggest 5 subgroups of low back pain. One of them is "low back pain with movement control impairment". In this subgroup, Luomajoki studied the reliability of different functional tests used in clinical practice. 6 out of 10 motion control fault tests show good reliability.
• The quantified analysis of the movement of low back pain patients would make it possible to determine the sensitivity of detecting an anomaly in the 6 lumbar movement control tests.

LoBaCoM is a monocentric, exploratory prospective study.

The purpose is to define a kinematic (angular) threshold corresponding to an anomaly detected clinically by three therapists for each test.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Estimated): 50
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Vincent CREAC'H; Phone Number: +33(0)298017935; Email: vincent.creach@univ-brest.fr

Study Locations

• France
  • Finistère
    • Brest, Finistère, France, 29609
      • Recruiting
      • CHU de Brest
      • Contact: Vincent CREAC'H; Phone Number: +33(0)298017935; Email: vincent.creach@univ-brest.fr
      • Sub-Investigator: Marine BOURHIS
      • Sub-Investigator: Fanny GARGADENNEC
      • Sub-Investigator: Thimothée HOUGRON

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 99 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Aged more than 18 years
• Common low back pain with medical prescription for rehabilitation
• Signed consent
• Be affiliated to a social security scheme
• Be able to perform the lumbar motion control failure tests

Exclusion Criteria:

• Body Mass Index greater than 30 (obesity)
• Person who does not understand French
• Pregnant woman
• Refusal to participate
• Volunteer under guardianship or curatorship

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
• Allocation: N/A
• Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

1

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Other: motion control fault testing; Each patient make six motion control fault tests in the same order : "waiters bow"; "pelvic tilt"; "one leg stance"; "sitting knee extension"; "rocking 4 point kneeling"; "prone knee bend" This tests are performed three times.	Other: motion control fault tests; Patients make 6 motion control fault tests, in the same order. Each test is performed three times

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Range of compensation motion : "waiters bow" test	Lumbar flexion measured for test number 1 "waiters bow". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal	Day 0
Range of compensation motion : "pelvic tilt" test	thoracic flexion measured for test number 2 "pelvic tilt". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.	Day 0
Range of compensation motion : "One leg stance" test	Pelvic shift measured for test number 3 "One leg stance ". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.	Day 0
Range of compensation motion : "sitting knee extension" test	Lumbar flexion measured for test number 4 "sitting knee extension". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.	Day 0
Range of compensation motion : "rocking 4 point kneeling" test	Lumbar flexion and extension measured for test number 5 "rocking 4 point kneeling ". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.	Day 0
Range of compensation motion : "prone knee bend" test	Lumbar extension measured for test number 6 "prone knee bend". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal	Day 0

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Speed of execution for test 1	It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.	Day 0
Speed of execution for test 2	It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.	Day 0
Speed of execution for test 3	It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.	Day 0
Speed of execution for test 4	It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.	Day 0
Speed of execution for test 5	It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.	Day 0
Speed of execution for test 6	It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.	Day 0

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University Hospital, Brest

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): December 15, 2022
• Primary Completion (Estimated): December 15, 2024
• Study Completion (Estimated): December 15, 2024

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: August 19, 2022
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: August 19, 2022
• First Posted (Actual): August 22, 2022

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): July 13, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: July 12, 2023
• Last Verified: July 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Low back pain; Kinematic analysis; Clinical assessment; Movement control
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Pain; Neurologic Manifestations; Back Pain; Low Back Pain
• Other Study ID Numbers: 29BRC22.0128

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: All collected data that underlie results in a publication
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: Data will be available after the publication of result and ending fifteen years following the last visit of the last patient
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: Data access requests will be reviewed by the internal committee of Brest University Hospital. Requestors will be required to sign and complete a data access agreement.
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No